Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sacrosanct" data-source="post: 6944441" data-attributes="member: 15700">This is not true, and is a common fallacy.&nbsp; Just because there are more pages for combat rules, does not mean it is &quot;obvious the actual ruleset emphasizes combat over the other two pillars.&quot;&nbsp; Again, you're making assumptions based on your preferred playstyle.&nbsp; If that logic were true, than 90% of all PCs would be casters, because spells take up most of the page count in the PHB.&nbsp; And we know that isn't true.&nbsp; Just because combat may require more technical rules because it can be more complex, doesn't mean it's obvious the game emphasizes this.&nbsp; For example...It was inspired as a wargame, but was created because they wanted what a wargame wasn't giving:&nbsp; roleplaying.&nbsp; This is important.&nbsp; If you're going to invoke the history of D&amp;D, then I'd hope you had considered that for most of D&amp;D's history (1974 to 2000), combat was the last resort of the party.&nbsp; Not only does it flat out tell you this in the AD&amp;D DMG, but the rules made combat extremely dangerous and not rewarding.&nbsp; The reward was XP and treasure--things you got without combat for the most part.&nbsp; The XP awards for monsters was pretty small as part of the XP pie.&nbsp; You were encouraged to avoid combat whenever necessary.&nbsp; You had no idea how many encounters you would have, and every encounter could be deadly in an instant--even to higher level PCs.So I'm sorry, but history is not on your side here.&nbsp; Nor is the design.&nbsp; And clearly several other players have also said their playstyle is different.&nbsp; I get that it's your preferred playstyle, and that's cool, but you need to stop assuming your style is the one true way or even the default way to play D&amp;D.&nbsp; Rather, the great thing about D&amp;D is that it allows most of us to play in the style we like, which is a very notable accomplishment.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sacrosanct, post: 6944441, member: 15700"] This is not true, and is a common fallacy. Just because there are more pages for combat rules, does not mean it is "obvious the actual ruleset emphasizes combat over the other two pillars." Again, you're making assumptions based on your preferred playstyle. If that logic were true, than 90% of all PCs would be casters, because spells take up most of the page count in the PHB. And we know that isn't true. Just because combat may require more technical rules because it can be more complex, doesn't mean it's obvious the game emphasizes this. For example... It was inspired as a wargame, but was created because they wanted what a wargame wasn't giving: roleplaying. This is important. If you're going to invoke the history of D&D, then I'd hope you had considered that for most of D&D's history (1974 to 2000), combat was the [i]last[/i] resort of the party. Not only does it flat out tell you this in the AD&D DMG, but the rules made combat extremely dangerous and not rewarding. The reward was XP and treasure--things you got without combat for the most part. The XP awards for monsters was pretty small as part of the XP pie. You were encouraged to avoid combat whenever necessary. You had no idea how many encounters you would have, and every encounter could be deadly in an instant--even to higher level PCs. So I'm sorry, but history is not on your side here. Nor is the design. And clearly several other players have also said their playstyle is different. I get that it's your preferred playstyle, and that's cool, but you need to stop assuming your style is the one true way or even the default way to play D&D. Rather, the great thing about D&D is that it allows most of us to play in the style we like, which is a very notable accomplishment. [/QUOTE]

Verification